Wilah nr2 hope you can help with identification - Page 2

PenangsangII · 10th January 2012, 05:27 AM

Alan, indeed I am based in Malaysia, born in Malaysia from Malaysian parents. However, I am also a Javanese, speak Jawanese (ngoko) though somewhat can understand Jawa krama.

I know some of Malaysians of Jawanese descents belief system with regards to Jawanese keris is different compares to what the "Mataram kraton" belief system. It could be due to mix of cultures between the Jawanese and the local population in the peninsula, mostly Minangs and Bugis. But I was also told by an elderly kerisman, the belief system of the jawanese in Malaysia is actually a slowly evolved belief system since the mass exodus of the Jawanese to the peninsula during Amangkurat era. Some elderly kerismen quoted the belief system can be traced back to the Demak era after Adipati Yunus expedition to Malaka in early 16th century. No reference or writings can be produced. This is purely oral tradition.

Furthermore, in the culturally mixed society in Malaysia, keris is a keris, no matter where it originates from, as long as it can be used as intended, will be accepted as keris Melayu. The famous Taming Sari, though Jawanese of origin, is considered keris Melayu. The keris pusaka of the Kelantan Sultan, is a (claimed) Majapahit daphur Pandawa Cinarita - its regarded as Malay keris. Similarly also to kerises from other parts of the archipelago, we simply term them "keris Melayu". only when books and internet start to reclassify the kerises based from the place of origin, Malaysian collectors start to reclassify the kerises - be it Jawanese, Minang, Palembang, Bugis and so on

Jean · 10th January 2012, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

To anybody who is used to following Javanese standards of appraisal, the differences of style between these two blades (posts # 10 & 17) is immediately obvious and must place them into two totally separate categories.
If we look at the two straight blades shown in post # 25, stylistic variation is even greater.

When we come to consider physical size of blade, what we know is this:- keris from Bali, Blambangan, and Banten all have similar proportions. These are the "big" keris.

Hello Alan and PenangsangII,
Thank you for your very interesting insights!
Alan, from my untrained eye I see significant similarities between the blades shown in post # 10 (top) and # 25 (top) on one hand (pejetan, tikel alis, indistinct pamor), and those shown in post # 17 and # 25 (bottom) on the other hand. However I would interpret the differences between these 2 sets of blades as due to the age (the second set looks significantly younger than the first one), and the evolution of the workmanship and style from the smiths. I would be open to accept that the second set of blades was not made in the Cirebon area but copying the older blades.
IMO these "corok" blades constitute another category of "big" krisses besides those from Bali, Blambangan, and Banten.
PenangsangII, the Cirebon/ Ceribon krisses are also very appreciated by the Dutch collectors, probably because they are different and less common than the Central Javanese ones.
Best regards

A. G. Maisey · 11th January 2012, 01:20 PM

Jean, early this morning I wrote another detailed, analytical response to your most recent post, but I have thought on this matter during today, and have decided that it would be a total waste of time to post my response.

I see these blades as having significant differences.

You see the same blades as having significant similarities.

I see with eyes that have been trained in a Javanese way of looking at keris.

You see with the eyes of a collector schooled in Euro-centric values.

And we both only have images on a screen to look at.

Nope. I've wasted enough time on this.

However, I will leave you with these thoughts:-

During the 1400's Cirebon was just a little village, mainly occupied with fishing, at this time it was under the domination of Pajajaran. It became an Islamic enclave by the 1500's , broke away from Pajajaran and became a sultanate, and the recognized father of Cirebon, Sunan Gunungjati appeared on the scene.

By about 1660 Cirebon had fragmented into 3 or 4 little principalities, and Cirebon's next door neighbour, Banten , took advantage of this fragmentation and occupied Cirebon during the 1670's.

The princes of Cirebon didn't like this much, so they tried to form an alliance with Mataram, but then Mataram sold them out, and by the late 1670's the Dutch had control of Cirebon. In the early 1680's Cirebon signed a treaty with the Dutch. By the early 1700's Cirebon had become a Dutch protectorate. The Dutch divided the administration of Cirebon between 3 of the princes, who each set up their own little court.

In fact, there was no "great kingdom of Cirebon". It was always second rate, no link to Javanese royalty , no honour.

Interestingly, the people of Cirebon identify themselves as Javanese, not Sundanese, and speak a dialect of Javanese, not a dialect of Sundanese.

The Javanese link their respect for particular Tosan Aji to respect for the associated realm. Cirebon never really was a realm.

It had links to Banten, it had links to Mataram, but it was never really an independent strong, political entity.

Consider this:-

We can probably identify various keris dress styles with Cirebon, and I would theorise that these various styles could in turn be aligned to the various royal houses of Cirebon.

However, I believe that it is extremely unlikely that we can ever identify a unique blade style as being the heritage of Cirebon. I believe that when the necessary research has been completed , and completed by independent researchers in an objective manner, we will find that the nobility of Cirebon filled their unique keris scabbards and hilts with blades from various other places, or had their own smiths copy these various other styles.

Cirebon was next door to Banten and for a time was occupied by Banten. It is very probable that the Banten style was reflected in the blades used by Cirebon people, whether those blades originated from Banten, or from Cirebon itself.

Recently there has been a commercial push to glorify Cirebon. It is perfectly understandable that the mind of the collector should be attracted to the idea of the Cirebon keris. However, I believe that eventually we will recognize that the "Cirebon Keris" is in fact a keris that uses Cirebon dress, and a blade style from other places.

Why does Cirebon not get a mention in the old references?

Easy answer:- it was regarded as a nonentity which lacked honour, and had no unique blade style. This is the reason Cirebon gets lumped in with Pajajaran.

Thus, we can most certainly have a Cirebon keris, but we cannot have a Cirebon blade, in Javanese terms, "tangguh Cirebon", or as I am wont to phrase it, "Cirebon classification."

Further, look at the dates involved:- all this happened pre-1700's. By the 1700's Cirebon was well and truly under the Dutch thumb. It had never had the opportunity to develop anything , and then the Dutch fell out of the sky and smothered Cirebon.

Consider all this and then draw your own conclusions.

Marcokeris · 11th January 2012, 04:18 PM

Why the old handles Cirebon are so beautiful and fascinating?

A. G. Maisey · 11th January 2012, 09:33 PM

Yes, the old hilts usually attributed to Cirebon do display a high level of artistic excellence.

As to why this is so, I doubt that we will ever know. We could theorise about it all day, and one guess is probably as good as another.

My own personal theory is that the artistic expression shown in the Cirebon hilts, and in other areas of Cirebon art and craft, was generated by the twofold factors of external Chinese influence, and a resurgence of Javanese values, similar to what happened in Kartosuro when Dutch overlordship threatened Javanese culture.

These influences, combined with a spirit of competition between the royal houses administering Cirebon resulted in the production of the beautiful hilts that we now associate with this area.

Marcokeris · 11th January 2012, 11:13 PM

Very nice theory

Thanks i like it

PenangsangII · 12th January 2012, 03:13 AM

I think Cirebon's so-called keris is unique in its own way. The mix of various cultures - Sunda, Jawanese, Malay, Makassar, Bugis, Sumatra, Arab, Chinese etc has made the keris culture in Cirebon as such, whilst Mataram remains the center of Jawanese culture.

To think of it again, IMHO even the great Majapahit empire also consisted of a lot of cultures as they are more open, similarly Demak and to certain level Cirebon. Mataram since its inception wanted to be in seclusion to avoid outside influences. this is understandable as Panembahan Senopati came from a family of "no honor" - he was just a descendant of a peasant who pretended to be of Majapahit linage - this is the way Jawanese outside Indonesia see it.

David · 12th January 2012, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PenangsangII

Mataram since its inception wanted to be in seclusion to avoid outside influences. this is understandable as Panembahan Senopati came from a family of "no honor" - he was just a descendant of a peasant who pretended to be of Majapahit linage - this is the way Jawanese outside Indonesia see it.

"Honor" can certainly be a matter of perspective. In the back-stabbing world of power and royal courts i'm not convinced it is always possible to establish "honor". That said, are you truly capable of speaking for the perspective of all Jawanese living outside Indonesia?

A. G. Maisey · 12th January 2012, 05:46 AM

Actually David, Penangsang is pretty right about Senopati.

He was the biggest landholder in the district, married into royalty, then refused to pay tribute to Pajang. He had no royal blood, and in fact the claim of descent from Majapahit for the House of Mataram rests in the female line, not the male line.

When I read this period of Javanese history, it strikes me as sounding like a Javanese parallel to the history of the Mafia in modern USA. Sutawijaya (Senopati) was a boss, who decided that he wanted to become "Boss of the Bosses", so he staged a take-over.

I don't know about the perspective of Javanese people living outside Jawa, but I do know about the founding of Mataram, and about Senopati, and Penangsang's remarks are pretty close to the mark.

From the time of Senopati right through to probably Kartosuro, the House of Mataram was dedicated to trying to prove its legitimacy.

Linguists have speculated that their efforts to prove that they were in fact royalty were responsible for the development of Modern Javanese from Old Javanese.

Prior to Mataram it appears that Old Javanese, which lacks much of the artificial construct of the multi level Modern Javanese, was in general usage, but the rulers of Mataram introduced the additional language levels of Modern Javanese to drive home to everybody that they must be respected.

Javanese history makes very good reading. Not dry at all, constant movement, and lots and lots of blood.

PenangsangII · 12th January 2012, 08:12 AM

David, forgive my crude language, by saying "outside Jawa", I was actually trying to give general perspective of the people around the Nusantara land with respect to "Jawa speaking world"

Alan, as always, your input deepens further my knowledge about keris, its culture, history, philosophy and the people themselves. I cant thank you enough.

tunggulametung · 12th January 2012, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Yes, the old hilts usually attributed to Cirebon do display a high level of artistic excellence.

As to why this is so, I doubt that we will ever know. We could theorise about it all day, and one guess is probably as good as another.

My own personal theory is that the artistic expression shown in the Cirebon hilts, and in other areas of Cirebon art and craft, was generated by the twofold factors of external Chinese influence, and a resurgence of Javanese values, similar to what happened in Kartosuro when Dutch overlordship threatened Javanese culture.

These influences, combined with a spirit of competition between the royal houses administering Cirebon resulted in the production of the beautiful hilts that we now associate with this area.

There's an interesting (not popular) theory about the history of maritime South East Asia first wave Ismalization that connected and dates back to Zheng He expedition, which also speculates that (if I remember correctly) most if not all of Wali Songo (incl. Gunung Jati) and even Raden Patah of Demak are Muslim Chinese/descent, hence the strong Chinese influence in pesisiran arts. I always thought that once the Javanese keris are similar to pesisiran keris in old European collection and the smaller distinct style comes later, do you think I'm at lost on this matter?

David · 12th January 2012, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Actually David, Penangsang is pretty right about Senopati.

Yes Alan, i am aware of some of the history here. That was why i suggested that establishing honor in the case of the court history of Jawa is often difficult at best.

And this history is, as you say, a pretty good read with lots and lots of blood.

A. G. Maisey · 12th January 2012, 09:59 PM

Yes David, the question of "honour" is something else entirely.

A review of the "honour" of all leaders and politicians at all times and in all places will demonstrate that no matter where one should choose to look, "honour" (adherence to what is right as a conventional standard of conduct ---Oxford) is pretty thin on the ground.

In respect of Jawa in particular, Senopati was probably no worse than his predecessors, nor those who came after him.

The mighty Majapahit was the product of deceit and double-cross.
Islam destroyed Majapahit from within , son against father, and so it continues.

It is interesting to note that the recent succession of PBXIII of Surakarta was the product of one brother's supporters seizing control of the Karaton upon the passing of PBXII, and thus depriving the named heir of the throne.

"Honour"?

What is the meaning of the word?

Oxford can give us a definition, but in practice I feel that honour is seldom found.

In respect of the Islamisation of Jawa, close study of this will show that the penetration of Islam into Jawa flowed into society from two directions:- from the top down, and from the bottom up.

The princes of Majapahit were in control of trade in the ports along the north coast. As Muslim traders came to Jawa and established enclaves these Muslim traders formed a trade network, and the indigenous Javanese traders became more and more excluded. In order to ensure the continuing success of trade, these Majapahit princes converted one by one to Islam. This conversion culminated with the conversion to Islam of Brawijaya V of Majapahit, at the point of Raden Patah's sword, who was his own son, and had established Demak.

At this point in history, the Muslim influence was probably more weighted towards Gujerat, but Raden Patah himself seems to have had a Chinese mother, and it is probable that the very earliest contact of Jawa with Islam, did indeed come from Chinese traders.

At the other end of the social scale the dispossessed of Majapahit, and the landless rural workers were influenced to convert by gifts of land and support from Muslim traders who had established enclaves along the north coast. The traders would come with one trade wind, and would then wait a number of months for the wind to turn, so they could sail home again. Over time these Muslim traders established settlements, and through their wealth gained control over land. To populate this land they drew upon the dispossessed and the poor, who were given land to work in exchange for converting to Islam.

The conversion of Jawa to Islam cannot be separated from the expansion of trade.

PenangsangII · 13th January 2012, 03:01 AM

Thank you again Alan for yet another enlightening interpretation of Jawanese history.

Yes, the definition of "honor" is varied depending from where you look at things. Since Ken Arok staged a coup d'etat against Kadiri, and continuous bloodshed of keris Mpu Gandring for the Singhasari throne, then Kadiri, then Majapahit right to Demak and Mataram. The list goes on and on till Diponegoro war.

But then, from what we have been told by history books, Majapahit and Demak (including Cirebon) shared one common value. That is acceptance towards outside Jawanese culture to flourish. In fact, many influential administrators during Majapahit and Demak were not Jawanese at all. Mataram till Amangkurat era however, whilst trying to exert its legitimacy, it had to create its own Jawanese identity to the point of creating a wider difference in terms of keris as compared to Cirebon, Sumatra and the rest of the archipelago. In these places, the keris culture has not changed much since Majapahit, or even since Singhasari era. This of course is only my personal observation.

A. G. Maisey · 13th January 2012, 04:04 AM

Just to clarify a point Penangsang:- what I write on these historical topics is never my interpretation, it is simply the repetition of what can be found in any number of books written by professional historians.

On the other hand, what I may write about keris is sometimes what I have been taught, sometimes from my own observations or reasoning and research.

It is certainly true that Majapahit and the coastal political entities were not reluctant to use the skills of foreigners, being situated close to trade routes, foreigners were seemingly never in short supply in the coastal settlements.

Mataram , however, was an inland kingdom. The rulers of Mataram were very much pre-occupied with trying to demonstrate their legitimacy, but I feel that they also would not have been reluctant to employ skilled foreigners, had these people been available.

However, perhaps it is best not to try to link these matters to keris style. Mataram was preceded by Pajang, Pajang by Demak, and these are all moderately sized keris.

Some of the keris that are attributed to the western parts of Jawa are quite large, others are of normal size; Tuban is North Coast, some of its keris are enormous, but others are normal size. My own feeling is that the variation in size is related to firstly, easier availability of material in coastal locations than in the hinterland, and secondly size related to social standing of the owner. Then there is the esoteric factor, as reflected in numeric values.

12th January 2012, 08:12 AM	#40
PenangsangII Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 401	David, forgive my crude language, by saying "outside Jawa", I was actually trying to give general perspective of the people around the Nusantara land with respect to "Jawa speaking world" Alan, as always, your input deepens further my knowledge about keris, its culture, history, philosophy and the people themselves. I cant thank you enough. Last edited by PenangsangII; 12th January 2012 at 08:25 AM.

10th January 2012, 05:27 AM	#31
PenangsangII Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 401	Alan, indeed I am based in Malaysia, born in Malaysia from Malaysian parents. However, I am also a Javanese, speak Jawanese (ngoko) though somewhat can understand Jawa krama. I know some of Malaysians of Jawanese descents belief system with regards to Jawanese keris is different compares to what the "Mataram kraton" belief system. It could be due to mix of cultures between the Jawanese and the local population in the peninsula, mostly Minangs and Bugis. But I was also told by an elderly kerisman, the belief system of the jawanese in Malaysia is actually a slowly evolved belief system since the mass exodus of the Jawanese to the peninsula during Amangkurat era. Some elderly kerismen quoted the belief system can be traced back to the Demak era after Adipati Yunus expedition to Malaka in early 16th century. No reference or writings can be produced. This is purely oral tradition. Furthermore, in the culturally mixed society in Malaysia, keris is a keris, no matter where it originates from, as long as it can be used as intended, will be accepted as keris Melayu. The famous Taming Sari, though Jawanese of origin, is considered keris Melayu. The keris pusaka of the Kelantan Sultan, is a (claimed) Majapahit daphur Pandawa Cinarita - its regarded as Malay keris. Similarly also to kerises from other parts of the archipelago, we simply term them "keris Melayu". only when books and internet start to reclassify the kerises based from the place of origin, Malaysian collectors start to reclassify the kerises - be it Jawanese, Minang, Palembang, Bugis and so on

11th January 2012, 01:20 PM	#33
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Jean, early this morning I wrote another detailed, analytical response to your most recent post, but I have thought on this matter during today, and have decided that it would be a total waste of time to post my response. I see these blades as having significant differences. You see the same blades as having significant similarities. I see with eyes that have been trained in a Javanese way of looking at keris. You see with the eyes of a collector schooled in Euro-centric values. And we both only have images on a screen to look at. Nope. I've wasted enough time on this. However, I will leave you with these thoughts:- During the 1400's Cirebon was just a little village, mainly occupied with fishing, at this time it was under the domination of Pajajaran. It became an Islamic enclave by the 1500's , broke away from Pajajaran and became a sultanate, and the recognized father of Cirebon, Sunan Gunungjati appeared on the scene. By about 1660 Cirebon had fragmented into 3 or 4 little principalities, and Cirebon's next door neighbour, Banten , took advantage of this fragmentation and occupied Cirebon during the 1670's. The princes of Cirebon didn't like this much, so they tried to form an alliance with Mataram, but then Mataram sold them out, and by the late 1670's the Dutch had control of Cirebon. In the early 1680's Cirebon signed a treaty with the Dutch. By the early 1700's Cirebon had become a Dutch protectorate. The Dutch divided the administration of Cirebon between 3 of the princes, who each set up their own little court. In fact, there was no "great kingdom of Cirebon". It was always second rate, no link to Javanese royalty , no honour. Interestingly, the people of Cirebon identify themselves as Javanese, not Sundanese, and speak a dialect of Javanese, not a dialect of Sundanese. The Javanese link their respect for particular Tosan Aji to respect for the associated realm. Cirebon never really was a realm. It had links to Banten, it had links to Mataram, but it was never really an independent strong, political entity. Consider this:- We can probably identify various keris dress styles with Cirebon, and I would theorise that these various styles could in turn be aligned to the various royal houses of Cirebon. However, I believe that it is extremely unlikely that we can ever identify a unique blade style as being the heritage of Cirebon. I believe that when the necessary research has been completed , and completed by independent researchers in an objective manner, we will find that the nobility of Cirebon filled their unique keris scabbards and hilts with blades from various other places, or had their own smiths copy these various other styles. Cirebon was next door to Banten and for a time was occupied by Banten. It is very probable that the Banten style was reflected in the blades used by Cirebon people, whether those blades originated from Banten, or from Cirebon itself. Recently there has been a commercial push to glorify Cirebon. It is perfectly understandable that the mind of the collector should be attracted to the idea of the Cirebon keris. However, I believe that eventually we will recognize that the "Cirebon Keris" is in fact a keris that uses Cirebon dress, and a blade style from other places. Why does Cirebon not get a mention in the old references? Easy answer:- it was regarded as a nonentity which lacked honour, and had no unique blade style. This is the reason Cirebon gets lumped in with Pajajaran. Thus, we can most certainly have a Cirebon keris, but we cannot have a Cirebon blade, in Javanese terms, "tangguh Cirebon", or as I am wont to phrase it, "Cirebon classification." Further, look at the dates involved:- all this happened pre-1700's. By the 1700's Cirebon was well and truly under the Dutch thumb. It had never had the opportunity to develop anything , and then the Dutch fell out of the sky and smothered Cirebon. Consider all this and then draw your own conclusions.

11th January 2012, 04:18 PM	#34
Marcokeris Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Italy Posts: 928	Why the old handles Cirebon are so beautiful and fascinating?

11th January 2012, 09:33 PM	#35
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Yes, the old hilts usually attributed to Cirebon do display a high level of artistic excellence. As to why this is so, I doubt that we will ever know. We could theorise about it all day, and one guess is probably as good as another. My own personal theory is that the artistic expression shown in the Cirebon hilts, and in other areas of Cirebon art and craft, was generated by the twofold factors of external Chinese influence, and a resurgence of Javanese values, similar to what happened in Kartosuro when Dutch overlordship threatened Javanese culture. These influences, combined with a spirit of competition between the royal houses administering Cirebon resulted in the production of the beautiful hilts that we now associate with this area.

11th January 2012, 11:13 PM	#36
Marcokeris Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Italy Posts: 928	Very nice theory Thanks i like it

12th January 2012, 03:13 AM	#37
PenangsangII Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 401	I think Cirebon's so-called keris is unique in its own way. The mix of various cultures - Sunda, Jawanese, Malay, Makassar, Bugis, Sumatra, Arab, Chinese etc has made the keris culture in Cirebon as such, whilst Mataram remains the center of Jawanese culture. To think of it again, IMHO even the great Majapahit empire also consisted of a lot of cultures as they are more open, similarly Demak and to certain level Cirebon. Mataram since its inception wanted to be in seclusion to avoid outside influences. this is understandable as Panembahan Senopati came from a family of "no honor" - he was just a descendant of a peasant who pretended to be of Majapahit linage - this is the way Jawanese outside Indonesia see it.

12th January 2012, 05:46 AM	#39
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Actually David, Penangsang is pretty right about Senopati. He was the biggest landholder in the district, married into royalty, then refused to pay tribute to Pajang. He had no royal blood, and in fact the claim of descent from Majapahit for the House of Mataram rests in the female line, not the male line. When I read this period of Javanese history, it strikes me as sounding like a Javanese parallel to the history of the Mafia in modern USA. Sutawijaya (Senopati) was a boss, who decided that he wanted to become "Boss of the Bosses", so he staged a take-over. I don't know about the perspective of Javanese people living outside Jawa, but I do know about the founding of Mataram, and about Senopati, and Penangsang's remarks are pretty close to the mark. From the time of Senopati right through to probably Kartosuro, the House of Mataram was dedicated to trying to prove its legitimacy. Linguists have speculated that their efforts to prove that they were in fact royalty were responsible for the development of Modern Javanese from Old Javanese. Prior to Mataram it appears that Old Javanese, which lacks much of the artificial construct of the multi level Modern Javanese, was in general usage, but the rulers of Mataram introduced the additional language levels of Modern Javanese to drive home to everybody that they must be respected. Javanese history makes very good reading. Not dry at all, constant movement, and lots and lots of blood.

12th January 2012, 09:59 PM	#43
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Yes David, the question of "honour" is something else entirely. A review of the "honour" of all leaders and politicians at all times and in all places will demonstrate that no matter where one should choose to look, "honour" (adherence to what is right as a conventional standard of conduct ---Oxford) is pretty thin on the ground. In respect of Jawa in particular, Senopati was probably no worse than his predecessors, nor those who came after him. The mighty Majapahit was the product of deceit and double-cross. Islam destroyed Majapahit from within , son against father, and so it continues. It is interesting to note that the recent succession of PBXIII of Surakarta was the product of one brother's supporters seizing control of the Karaton upon the passing of PBXII, and thus depriving the named heir of the throne. "Honour"? What is the meaning of the word? Oxford can give us a definition, but in practice I feel that honour is seldom found. In respect of the Islamisation of Jawa, close study of this will show that the penetration of Islam into Jawa flowed into society from two directions:- from the top down, and from the bottom up. The princes of Majapahit were in control of trade in the ports along the north coast. As Muslim traders came to Jawa and established enclaves these Muslim traders formed a trade network, and the indigenous Javanese traders became more and more excluded. In order to ensure the continuing success of trade, these Majapahit princes converted one by one to Islam. This conversion culminated with the conversion to Islam of Brawijaya V of Majapahit, at the point of Raden Patah's sword, who was his own son, and had established Demak. At this point in history, the Muslim influence was probably more weighted towards Gujerat, but Raden Patah himself seems to have had a Chinese mother, and it is probable that the very earliest contact of Jawa with Islam, did indeed come from Chinese traders. At the other end of the social scale the dispossessed of Majapahit, and the landless rural workers were influenced to convert by gifts of land and support from Muslim traders who had established enclaves along the north coast. The traders would come with one trade wind, and would then wait a number of months for the wind to turn, so they could sail home again. Over time these Muslim traders established settlements, and through their wealth gained control over land. To populate this land they drew upon the dispossessed and the poor, who were given land to work in exchange for converting to Islam. The conversion of Jawa to Islam cannot be separated from the expansion of trade.

13th January 2012, 03:01 AM	#44
PenangsangII Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 401	Thank you again Alan for yet another enlightening interpretation of Jawanese history. Yes, the definition of "honor" is varied depending from where you look at things. Since Ken Arok staged a coup d'etat against Kadiri, and continuous bloodshed of keris Mpu Gandring for the Singhasari throne, then Kadiri, then Majapahit right to Demak and Mataram. The list goes on and on till Diponegoro war. But then, from what we have been told by history books, Majapahit and Demak (including Cirebon) shared one common value. That is acceptance towards outside Jawanese culture to flourish. In fact, many influential administrators during Majapahit and Demak were not Jawanese at all. Mataram till Amangkurat era however, whilst trying to exert its legitimacy, it had to create its own Jawanese identity to the point of creating a wider difference in terms of keris as compared to Cirebon, Sumatra and the rest of the archipelago. In these places, the keris culture has not changed much since Majapahit, or even since Singhasari era. This of course is only my personal observation.

13th January 2012, 04:04 AM	#45
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Just to clarify a point Penangsang:- what I write on these historical topics is never my interpretation, it is simply the repetition of what can be found in any number of books written by professional historians. On the other hand, what I may write about keris is sometimes what I have been taught, sometimes from my own observations or reasoning and research. It is certainly true that Majapahit and the coastal political entities were not reluctant to use the skills of foreigners, being situated close to trade routes, foreigners were seemingly never in short supply in the coastal settlements. Mataram , however, was an inland kingdom. The rulers of Mataram were very much pre-occupied with trying to demonstrate their legitimacy, but I feel that they also would not have been reluctant to employ skilled foreigners, had these people been available. However, perhaps it is best not to try to link these matters to keris style. Mataram was preceded by Pajang, Pajang by Demak, and these are all moderately sized keris. Some of the keris that are attributed to the western parts of Jawa are quite large, others are of normal size; Tuban is North Coast, some of its keris are enormous, but others are normal size. My own feeling is that the variation in size is related to firstly, easier availability of material in coastal locations than in the hinterland, and secondly size related to social standing of the owner. Then there is the esoteric factor, as reflected in numeric values.